Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

In other words, remastering the original Star Trek preserved the original. "Remastering" TNG would be more like remaking the series.

No, remastering Star Trek: the Next Generation would be the creation of a new master. That's what "to remaster" means: to create a new master. And the creation of a new master copy that didn't use the original 35mm film negative would be moronic.

But the idea that making something HD means it's no longer the original is wrong. In most cases, making it HD is actually showing it closer to what it really looks like on film, making it more like the original.

Star Trek was mastered on 35mm film because that was the technology of the time. All television series that were shot on 35mm film in the 1960s were mastered on film. They were never meant, of course, to be exhibited on film nor shown in High Definition television. Indeed, HDTV didn't even exist at the time.

Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy

Re: Star Trek TNG Remastered?

Harvey wrote:

But the idea that making something HD means it's no longer the original is wrong. In most cases, making it HD is actually showing it closer to what it really looks like on film, making it more like the original.

Star Trek was mastered on 35mm film because that was the technology of the time. All television series that were shot on 35mm film in the 1960s were mastered on film. They were never meant, of course, to be exhibited on film nor shown in High Definition television. Indeed, HDTV didn't even exist at the time.

I wasn't talking about Star Trek in particular in the passage you quote. Feature films from the 60s -- or 50s or 40s or 30s, for that matter -- were indeed meant to be seen in great detail on the big screen. Thus, HD versions of, say, Casablanca or Planet of the Apes or 2001 or The Birds are closer to the way they were seen in the theaters. Too many people are under the mistaken impression that films made prior to "HDTV" are in the same definition they saw it on DVD on SD television, and that HD versions of old movies are somehow "new" versions, when in fact they are closer to the theatrical experience than VHS or DVD allowed.

Then, to crib from Bogart, they were misinformed. As was I in that particular case, it seems.

It's important to note, of course, that video in any form is just an approximation of a projected film image. Not only in detail--35mm has many times the detail even of HD--but in the process itself. Having just seen Casablanca in glorious 35mm last week, I can say that the HD version is nice (indeed, very nice), but it's not the real thing.

AGAIN, for the THIRD time, it isn't whether they are available NOW that's the concern, the concern is whether they CONTINUE to be available in the decades and centuries TO COME. In whatever format that is functioning at the time.

And don't think it'll be disc systems that are backward compatible for eternity.

And seriously, are you actually arguing, that if you break the law you can still get a hold of them, really?

Yes, I am. The fact is anyone can make a digital image of their DVDs, and keep it for the foreseeable future. Blu-ray is a red herring, the future is in downloads. This information is not going to go "out of print" because there will always be copies floating around in the ether. You are still thinking about it in a very 20th century way, but the same goes for the industry. They still don't really understand this because the people in charge haven't caught up with the new reality. It's like Rupert Murdoch talking about charging for News Corp content online. The man simply does not understand the nature of the internet.

A copy in the internet is still ILLEGAL, unless it's to be downloaded from a legal paysite. Thus, the same information applies here. If they DO NOT make it available for download from a legal paysite, we reach the same situation then not being put on the Blu-Ray disc.

If (that's a massive if) a HD version of TNG is produced, this will become the default, which CBS/Paramount/Whoever will wish to push, because otherwise what's the point in doing the HD transfer? Why bother to offer an SD alternative, which will require more disc authoring costs, disc space and time? They didn't include the original SD broadcasts of TOS, they simply used seamless branching for certain scenes. They may decide to do it, but there's no reason we should expect it.

Again, it does NOT cost more authoring costs, or time. And whether disc space remains empty or is uses, costs nothing. They used seamless branching for TOS, BECAUSE IT COULD BE USED FOR TOS. TOS was in its entirely put on film, nothing on video, thus simply cleaning up the film and putting it on Blu-Ray in HD, is the original episode, just a higher quality a transfer.

This will not be the case for TNG, because to get HD they will have to redo some of the visual effects like transporter effects, screen readouts and such as it is only exists on video. Thus, to "get an original" HD transfer that can be seamlessly branched, they would have to make two entirely separate CGI visual effects; one that is an EXACT replica of the SD one, and one that is the reimagined CGI brand new special effects sequences.

NOW THAT will cost massive amounts of extra dollars, as opposed to simply putting the SD versions on the discs as well.

And why would they do it? Because it necessary; something like that can't disappear, it needs to continue to be available for so many reasons. That, and to make money. We as customers, as fans of Star Trek, should realize the (historical) value of the original effort and that it should remain intact. Thus, if Paramount seems to want to make the originals disappear, no longer release it; we as fans should collectively say: we won't buy it, unless you put them on it, and stick to it. If 99% of every potential customer, that is us Star Trek fans, refuses to buy it if the SD isn't on there, trust me that Paramount will put it on. They wish to make money, not waste lots of dollars and something nobody buys.

swaaye wrote:

I keep seeing this talk of BDROM versions of the DVD material.

If you really want all of the SD eps in one easily accessible location to watch on a whim, you can extract the episodes fairly easily from your DVDs. Put them onto a hard drive (USB say) in VOB format and watch all of them from there. Each episode is about 2GB so figure on around 350GB of space. Of course this "little" project will take hours of repetitive labor, but it is worth it in the end IMO.

Optical disks are obsolete. Hard drives are cheap.

So... what of those who don't have DVDs?

Elf Malakai wrote:

3D Master wrote:

Let's just make the hologram and burn the painting, eh?

Nobody's burning anything. That's not what the last several pages of discussion have been about. Stop with the histrionics.

If you are no longer able the acquire the original TNG episodes, then you might as well burn them, for ultimately the difference is negligible. It's about people being about people be able to watch/look at the work. (Incidentally, without being thrown in jail for it.)

I sincerely hope they will redo a lot of the screen graphics with something a bit more visually interesting if/when the remastering occurs...when I look at those graphics now, I can very well see that they were superimposed over the live action, and a lot of repeated graphics (Naked Now, etc.). A new HD version that blends that much better will help the suspension of disbelief so much better. That and a more 3D transporter effect - same style as in TNG, but more 3D like in First Contact. I'm eagerly awaiting news of the TNG-R project.

If you are no longer able the acquire the original TNG episodes, then you might as well burn them,

And if Paramount/CBS wish to do that, then that would be their prerogative.
It's their property, not yours. You are not entitled to anything.
You just have to take and eat what they give you, or not.

Wrong. I do not have take or eat a damn thing, because here's the newsflash they don't give me anything. They wish to sell me things. So I can choose to keep my money in my pocket, and not buy anything of theirs. And if enough people do that, you can force companies to change their product.

For example, did you know that the successor of the Intel 80286 chip was actually an object oriented computer that had nothing to do with 80386? But nobody bought it, and so, before they went belly up, they scrambled and all but juryrigged the 80386 and released that.

Mr. Laser Beam wrote:

3D Master wrote:

So... what of those who don't have DVDs?

Anyone who's made it all the way to now and *still* doesn't have a DVD player is not likely to be a Trek fan in the first place.

Wrong. I do not have take or eat a damn thing, because here's the newsflash they don't give me anything. They wish to sell me things. So I can choose to keep my money in my pocket, and not buy anything of theirs. And if enough people do that, you can force companies to change their product.

Wrong. I do not have take or eat a damn thing, because here's the newsflash they don't give me anything. They wish to sell me things. So I can choose to keep my money in my pocket, and not buy anything of theirs. And if enough people do that, you can force companies to change their product.

Yeah, but yours is a minority opinion - you don't matter at all.

You're repudiating everything trek stands for with that remark; all it takes for change is a man with a vision and will. Whether that change is for good or bad is not at issue, but your majority rules bullshit is depressing, uninspired and downright tragic thinking.

Exactly. Let's face it, people buying a High Definition version of TNG probably aren't going to care if the SD version is included. Having invested money in an HD set-up, why would you bother? Maybe some purists will, but again, no one is forcing you to buy them. Your existing DVDs will function adequately for the foreseeable future, as Blu-ray players are backwards compatible. You have had ample opportunity to buy the DVDs, and even if they go out of print, there will be plenty on eBay. If you are that much of a purist, you will already own the DVDs.

The bottom line is that Paramount (or whoever) are under no compulsion to include the old versions on an HD release, and I'll be surprised if they do. If they do, then fine, everyone's a winner, and this whole argument is pointless. On the other hand, the fact that there may never be a TNG-R is more likely to render this entire thread pointless. But it's fun to argue.

__________________
She bought her first new car and you hit her with a drunk driver. What, is that supposed to be funny?

Wrong. I do not have take or eat a damn thing, because here's the newsflash they don't give me anything. They wish to sell me things. So I can choose to keep my money in my pocket, and not buy anything of theirs. And if enough people do that, you can force companies to change their product.

Yeah, but yours is a minority opinion - you don't matter at all.

You're repudiating everything trek stands for with that remark; all it takes for change is a man with a vision and will. Whether that change is for good or bad is not at issue, but your majority rules bullshit is depressing, uninspired and downright tragic thinking.

It's simple business not some 'vision'.
Altering a few VFX-shots for a new release would, by the way, in no way harm any vision, if there is one.